Smith & Leishman v. Flood [1915] ScotLR 471 (17 March 1915)

Smith & Leishman v. Flood [1915] ScotLR 471 (17 March 1915)

The arbitrator was entitled to find that the respondent's failure to give statutory notice as soon as practicable was due to reasonable cause, namely, his honest belief that the injury was not serious until medical advice and subsequent events revealed its gravity. This justified the delay under the statutory exception, and the respondent was not barred from maintaining his claim.

Citation
[1915] ScotLR 471
Parties
Appellants: Smith & Leishman; Respondent: John Flood
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 March 1915
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration (sheriff Court at Glasgow) Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Decision of Court of Session, Inner House, First Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; respondent entitled to compensation.
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Notice of Accident, Mistake or Reasonable Cause, Delay in Claim, Employer Prejudice
Labour Law Personal Injury Statutory Compensation Workmen's Compensation Notice of Accident Mistake or Reasonable Cause Delay in Claim Employer Prejudice

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Smith & Leishman

Appellants

John Flood

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration (sheriff Court at Glasgow) Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Decision of Court of Session, Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is barred from maintaining proceedings for compensation due to failure to give statutory notice as soon as practicable
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator was entitled to find that the failure was due to mistake or other reasonable cause
  3. 3 Whether respondent's incapacity was the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator was entitled to find that the respondent's failure to give statutory notice as soon as practicable was due to reasonable cause, namely, his honest belief that the injury was not serious until medical advice and subsequent events revealed its gravity. This justified the delay under the statutory exception, and the respondent was not barred from maintaining his claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; respondent entitled to compensation.

Orders

  • First question of law answered in the negative (not barred from maintaining proceedings).
  • Second question answered in the affirmative (arbitrator entitled to make findings).